amem_skill_list

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose the key traits: it is 'cheap', returns only an index of names and descriptions, and is meant to precede a view call. It does not mention pagination, ordering, or auth, but for a simple read-only list tool the disclosed cost and return shape are the critical behavioral facts.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences with zero waste. The purpose and return shape are front-loaded, followed by the recommended follow-up and the sibling distinction, all in an efficient order.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, so the description must explain return values, and it does ('index of names and descriptions only'). It also covers cost and next steps. Minor gaps remain: no mention of ordering, result count, or behavior for an empty index, but these are small for a lightweight list tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the single optional 'query' parameter is fully described in the input schema. The description itself never mentions the query parameter or how it ranks results, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('stored skills'), defines them as 'procedures the agent learned', and specifies the return as 'an index of names and descriptions only'. It explicitly distinguishes itself from amem_skill_view (load one) and amem_context (small durable facts), so an agent can pick it without opening another schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit sequencing: 'call this first, then amem_skill_view to load the one you need'. It also names an alternative for a different need ('use amem_context for small durable facts'), leaving no ambiguity about when to use this tool versus its siblings.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.